Legalectric

PJM transmission maps “are no longer publicly available.” Did you know that? Same with other transmission maps, now deemed “Critical Electric Infrastructure Information” and TOP SECRET. What utter crap.

Anyway, now that I’m settled in Delaware for a while, I’m digging around in PJM info, lots of which is “publicly available.” They’re doing pretty much the same thing out here that CapX 2020 is doing in Minnesota, but worse, because this is a “National Electric Interest Transmission Corridor,” so they can do whatever they want, if a state says “NO” they just go to the feds and FERC will give them what they want. But go figure, the states here in the Mid-Atlantic don’t regulate transmisison, so why do the think they need “NEITC” status?

Here’s their overall plan: PJM Regional Transmission Plan page

Here are some important pieces:

RTEP 2007 Table of Contents

RTEP 2007 – Executive Summary

RTEP 2007 – Xmsn System Expansion Drivers

RTEP 2007 – Section 3A – Approved 15 Year Xmsn Expansion Plan

RTEP 2007 – Section 3B – Approved 15 Year Xmsn Expansion Plan

RTEP 2007 – Section 3C – Approved 15 Year Xmsn Expansion Plan

RTEP 2007 – Section4 – Delaware

RTEP 2007 – Section 4 – New Jersey

RTEP 2007 – Section 5 – Addressing Long-Term Challenges

Another thing that bears a look-see is their forecasting report:

PJM 2008 Load and Forecast Report

More intimidation tactics going on… this time in phone calls claiming to be tied from Secretary of State’s office, and thankfully someone was savvy enough to question it.  They’re going down in flames and so these threats will probably ramp up to fever pitch before the election.

Here’s the STrib report:

Callers question registered Minnesota voters’ eligibility

… and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie’s press release:

RITCHIE ALERTS PUBLIC TO VOTER INTIMIDATION TACTICS IN MINNESOTA

Allegations of voter intimidation and deceptive practices are investigated and prosecuted by county attorneys. To report voter intimidation, citizens may contact their county attorney directly or the Office of the Secretary of State at 1-877-600-8683. The Office of the Secretary of State forwards all allegations to county attorneys for further investigation and prosecution.

A bright spot in this Dogawful election from Paul Hipp shades of Gil Scott Herron’s Jo’berg:

Bachmann’s going down in flames, Palin’s trailing not too far behind…

I had to vote by absentee ballot this tie, so I’m done and the wait is excruciatingly long… will ’round midnight on November 4 going into November 5 ever get here? AAAAAAAGH!

A MUST READ!

It’s that time of year again — it’s the NERC report!

2008 NERC Reliabiity Assessment

There’s a lot going on these days, and sorry about this delay, here’s the long awaited “independent conslutant” report on Big Stone:

Boston Pacific Final Report 10-21-08

The STrib’s article:

Consultants say utilities lowballed construction cost estimates

By H.J. CUMMINS, Star Tribune

October 22, 2008

Big Stone II took a big hit Wednesday when independent experts said the utilities behind the proposed South Dakota power plant did their math wrong.

In a report, sought by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC), Boston Pacific Co. concluded that in three fundamental projections — emissions, construction and fuel — the utilities regularly underestimated costs for the proposed coal-fired plant and overestimated costs for possible energy alternatives.

“In general we believe the range … used in the applicants’ analyses were not appropriate,” said the report of the Washington, D.C., energy consulting firm. “Put another way, they were out of line with current ‘best practices.'”

Environmental groups opposed to the plant applauded the report’s conclusions. “We’re pleased that yet another set of independent eyes have looked at the record, and largely agreed with the points that we have been making all along,” said Beth Goodpaster, who represents several of the groups, including the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and the Midwest Izaak Walton League.

The five Big Stone utilities — led by the Otter Tail Corp. of Fergus Falls — said their reading shows them not far from the report’s preferred numbers in areas such as construction and fuel costs. They take issue with its suggestion that a future carbon tax could go as high as $60 a ton.

“We don’t believe Congress would ever pass a cap-and-trade or tax at that high a figure,” said Big Stone II spokesman Dan Sharp.

Minnesota energy regulators got pulled into the controversy over the power plant, which would go up just across the border in South Dakota, because the utilities need permission to build power lines into Minnesota, where about half their sales would be. The utilities argue that they need the plant to meet growing energy demand. Opponents want clean-energy alternatives because coal-fired plants are major sources of pollutants such as carbon dioxide.

The Minnesota PUC ordered the report in June. It had been expected to make a decision about the permit after four years of debate but four commissioners appeared split, with the fifth, newcomer Dennis O’Brien, expressing frustration about the two sides’ conflicting cost projections.

Boston Pacific analyzed three of the projections: An expected federal tax on carbon dioxide and its effect on the cost of coal-produced energy; the accuracy of the utilities’ plant construction costs; and a comparison between the cost of coal energy compared to natural gas.

The consultants decided that the utilities’ projected carbon tax costs started low and failed to factor in inflation. They said the construction cost projections were below the consultants’ own low-end figures, and any higher costs would fall on ratepayers. Also, they criticized the utilities for not testing their coal price projections against a wider range of possible natural gas prices, given the fuel’s historical volatility.

Lots to read, but it looks like some choice tables showing estimated CO2 costs and construction costs (the per kW costs in the table seem very low and it doesn’t seem that the projected costs of Mesaba were in the mix). More later after I read it… right… when…